Article if the title isn't linked-- http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/12/turnout-steady-in-swing-states-and-down-in-others-but-many-votes-remain-uncounted/
This article is about the number of votes that were casted this year and comparing them to 2008's voting numbers. This showed that there was a -6.8% drop-off from 2008, or was there? This also talks about how many votes still have not even been counted. California has a -25.1% voter turnout this year as of right now, but tit is estimated that there are still a couple million votes that haven't been counted yet. The battleground states, with the exceptions of PA and OH, generally increased which makes sense since that's were most of the advertising was. This could change though as Ohio still does not have all of its ballots counted. I was not surprised to see that the voter turnout this election was lower than in 2008 although it may be closer than this indicates.
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I found it interesting that voting turnout was down in battleground states such as Ohio. Across the nation, the voting participation may have gone down because people were less optimistic. In 2008, Obama ran on a promise of change, and some say he did not bring enough change. Also, like we read about in class, the youngest group of voters did not seem as energized about the election this time around. I would like to see how the rest of the vote counting pans out.
ReplyDeleteYou would think it would be simple to just count the votes and report the numbers; x for Obama, y votes for Romney, and maybe a handful for the Green Party or Libertarian candidates. But from working at the polls on Election Day, I was shocked at how many people were not correctly registered and had to fill out provisional ballots, or who were not registered at all and had to be turned away. I suppose it's an interesting conundrum, that true election results can be delayed due to trying to tabulate such ballots along with the regularly cast ones to ensure that no one is unfairly disenfranchised.
ReplyDeleteEven though it's now post-election, I have seen some articles (don't remember where, just a stumble-upon kind of deal) that have showed overcasting of votes as opposed to the amount of registered voters. I feel like this election, Democrats were less enthused by Obama's words as they were in 2008. I also feel like Republicans were not too crazy about Mitt Romney. While I still voted and supported who I voted completely, neither candidate really presented a convincing next four years in America. If people, and I'm sure they did, feel the same way, that could explain the voter decrease. We just weren't enthused by either candidate.
ReplyDeleteI feel that a agree most with Talia. While Romney's personality didn't agree with the american public neither did Obama's broken promises. I was surprised in reading this article how many people vote by mail in or absentee ballots and that sometimes they are not fully counted until after election day.
ReplyDeleteI also believe the lower amount of voters is definitely largely due to the lack of enthusiasm towards Obama's campaign compared to in 2008. It seems people were disappointed from what they viewed as a lack of change, but didn't necessarily trust Romney to make the needed change either. It also surprises me how many votes remain uncounted for so long.
ReplyDeleteBefore this election, I never realized all the possible ways one can vote and how these ways can make it a longer process to count the votes. In 2008, there was a different atmosphere about the elections as a whole. The nation was more excited and ready for a new direction for the country. This year there wasn't the same excitement. I wonder if the amount of votes decrease from 2008, because there was an incumbent this year and wasn't one in 2008.
ReplyDeleteI too was surprised at just how many people voted via provisional ballots or mail or were simply unregistered. There was most definitely a lack of enthusiasm in the country as a whole in this election. Obama was an incumbent and had to fight to gain support/keep support while Americans knew he hadn't lived up to all of his promises and plans. And his opponent, Romney, was struggling to gain wide support as well. The great decrease in voter turnout in California really surprised me, while I recognize there are still 700,000 votes to be counted that state had a 25.1% drop and that says something. I will be interested to see the final numbers when all the votes are counted.
ReplyDeleteAnother explanation for the voter decrease from the 2008 election, aside from a lack of enthusiasm for the candidates, is that in states where there was essentially no chance for one of the parties to gain the majority of votes, the members of the party who were in the minority may have felt that their votes would have zero impact on the outcome of the election. I imagine that their reasoning behind not voting was "Why vote if it won't make a difference?"
ReplyDeleteWith regard to the higher voter turnout rate in 2012 compared to 2008 in Pennsylvania and Ohio, these statistics just show that advertising is rather effective. One would ask, why don't the candidates do this within every state? As a recent topic in our Gov class, the spending of an election such as this would be blown out of proportion and spending would be extremely larger although the spending in 2012 has hit a rare high.
ReplyDeleteWell you can't really blame the people of Ohio for not being as energized to vote after being bombarded with ad after ad and honestly would have been unbearable after a certain point. I mean you could say that there was too much campaigning in the state and really could have turned away voters because of it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Adam it seems that there must be a point where the amount of advertising begins turning potential voters away along the same principle of ballot fatigue
DeleteI agree with Adam and think that the advertising is another form of fatigue. Advertising is very crucial to elections and is effective in the battleground states but as we learned it is not worth the money, time, and effort in many of the states.
ReplyDeleteIt is very surprising to me to see that voter turnout was lower in Ohio in this past election than it was in 2008. However, it can be understood because of Obama's inability to provide for the change he promised and the lower enthusiasm among younger voters.
ReplyDeleteIt is possible that the numbers seemed to have dropped because in many states where it appeared Obama was going to easily win people no longer saw the need in adding to what would be an easy victory. California was always expected to go in favor of Obama, so I could definitely see some people taking the lazy way out and just not voting at all in that state.
ReplyDeleteIt amazes me how long it took for vottes to get counted in certain states. It is also intriguing that there was such a lower amount of votes cast in this previous election. I believe that many people were not pleased with either candidate. Obama because he promised an abundance of changes and never seemed to fullfill those promises.
ReplyDelete